HK UMP. It probably still has all the downsides of an MP5 (proprietary armorers etc) but it's a pretty weapon! I'm with Matt1984, the MP5 serves a very important role with SRT teams (if you weren't aware they are Army's SWAT teams). He's saying that a 9mm SMG is better for that role than an M4. Ignore Afghanistan/Iraq, think on-post housing. I believe the SRT team at Ft. Hood (89th MP BDE) has MP5s but I may be wrong, it's been almost 5 years since I was there.

As for drivers of MRAPs, I had an M4 and I was a driver. I've been hit with IEDs and we stayed put until EOD cleared the immediate area for secondaries. Only once did I dismount after a blast and that's because we were on fire but I'm glad I had my M4 with me. Not sure if any of you have experience with the M1117 ASV but it's WAY more cramped than an MRAP and I still was able to wiggle out of the hatch with my M4.

__________________

“Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.” ~ Ronald Reagan
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." ~ Thomas Jefferson
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin

Ever heard of "if it works don't fix it"?
There is no reason for an SMG especially for pilots or tankers or any other "support" role. They get issued M4's because they are small and compact. Plus there's nothing you can't do with a full auto M4 using subsonic rounds and a suppressor.

Before SFARTAEC became SFUAC, there was a school at Bragg called SOT. We traded in our CAR-15s for MP5s and learned how to shoot close quarters, room clear, flow through a structure, link up, etc. The MP5 was awesome - reliable, accurate, compact.

Then no sooner then I return to the unit to find that we're turning in all of our MP5s (except for the SDs) because we're switching to CAR-15s in that mission. Why? As it was posted earlier, "don't bring a pistol to a rifle fight." The MP5 is compact, but not THAT compact and it doesn't drop bad guys the way 5.56 does, especially if they are wearing body armor.

There is definitely a place for SMGs in the inventory, but not as a primary weapon any more. I've often thought that it made more sense to give support folks and vehicle operators intermediate PDWs like the P90 or MP7, instead of full sized M16A2s. But unfortunately it doesn't work that way. SMGs are still used in SOF, but it's one of the few things that hasn't nor probably ever will trickle down to the conventional side.

__________________
--Brando

If you’re driven by partisan tribalism more than ideology, if getting in rhetorical digs at liberals thrills you more than persuading adversaries or achieving policy victories, it makes sense that you would fight substantively inconsequential battles with no more or less vigor than any other…

It's good in theory but when you think about it, it doesn't really make sense.

The units that would NEED something like this already have it in their armories. But to give a widescale issue of these would require training for the armorers and custodians, parts kits, tools, mags, ammo.

9mm ammo is not something widely distributed, it's really only used for pistol only ranges and not in movement ranges.

The m4 is plenty small for any job that would require you to need a weapon. Sure there are circumstances where a smaller SMG type rifle would come in handy but those situations are so rare fiscally it doesn't make sense to implement it.

What the military needs to focus on is redistributing m4s, radios, and other newer or gear thats in better shape from pog units who don't use it to grunts and combat mos' that actually need it. Reserve motor t operators, or reserves in general, admin, cook, bulk fuel, non deployable units, basically jobs that aren't supposed to see combat shouldn't have nice/new gear when units that are seeing constant deployments get **** gear. My rifle and nvgs have been through 6 deployments that is ridiculous, at the range I will see people who only fire their weapon on qual day with a brand new m4, peq, acog. My ****ty old gear should be given to someone whos life doesn't depend on it day in and day out to work.

__________________

Sure, I've been called a xenophobe, but the truth is, I'm not. I honestly just feel that America is the best country and the other countries aren't as good. That used to be called patriotism.

I dont think any commander would pitch the idea of buying MP5's for a unit because they are "cool." MP5s are a logistical nightmare for units to have because they are expensive, they have to have specialized armors work on them, the replacement parts are expensive, and finally the army doesn't have an actual qualification table for the MP5. Like every weapon in the army you have to qualify and document it for each user. So Commanders would have to have a SOP and grading standard for MP5 qual. So with that being said no unit in the military would have a weapon because its "cool" thats a no-go. 5.56 in some instances causes to much collateral damage thats why units use SMG's. I love m4's but realistically you can't use them for everything, especially when you have a specific mission.

Completely correct because I was thinking he was talking about civilians at first due to my lack of reading comprehension. I was only looking at it in that respect. For military applications, you're probably right about being a logistical nightmare and that wouldn't be fun to try to qualify with.

for someone who is stuck with a 30+ year old A2 i will take a M4 in a heartbeat. the Reserves place no priority in weapons at all in general. so a SMG is not even a factor IMO. getting the Reserves updated to either a M4 or M16A4 would be nice but that makes about as much sense as pissing in the wind for those at USARC in alanta.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAK

What the military needs to focus on is redistributing m4s, radios, and other newer or gear thats in better shape from pog units who don't use it to grunts and combat mos' that actually need it. Reserve motor t operators, or reserves in general, admin, cook, bulk fuel, non deployable units, basically jobs that aren't supposed to see combat shouldn't have nice/new gear when units that are seeing constant deployments get **** gear. My rifle and nvgs have been through 6 deployments that is ridiculous, at the range I will see people who only fire their weapon on qual day with a brand new m4, peq, acog. My ****ty old gear should be given to someone whos life doesn't depend on it day in and day out to work.

that's pretty funny saying that some units have new M4's i sure hell don't see many units that have new M16's period. as i stated my M16A2 is at least 20 to 30 years old. if they had their way we would still have A1's.

and as for support units not supposed to see combat well that went out the window in Iraq with just about everyone getting shot at and blown up. as for gear i believe everyone should get the same gear as everyone else. but in reality that won't happen and you and i both know it. i have been in the Reserves for 24 years and i have seen an improvement in new vehicles arriving for almost all the units in my area that my shop supports. as for gear the 63rd here in CA is going back to that pre war mentality allready. the "you'll get it at the MOB site" attitude is back.

heck last year the BN we fell under at Ft. Irwin wondered why my unit does'nt even have IBA and that is a requirement for rotation at Irwin. if you have been there for one i' sure that you know this. we are going again and falling under an AD BN and i cannot wait to hear their reaction that we don't have IBA and will have to borrow from them like we did last year.

so the gear disparretiy is still there for support units and line units. i do not support that disparety for the reasons of you never know where the hell you'll end up. the thinking that POG units should'nt the same gear as a line unit is not right IMO. yes line units will be directly engaged by the enemy but as of what happened in Iraq does'nt matter who you are on the MSR's or ASR's you can and will be either shot at or blown up or both you never know. so everyone in theater should have top of the line gear to get us all home in one piece. and yes i know that is not always possible for all to make it home.

and i will never make fun of that at all. we all want us all to come home alive. but war is war and people die. and we all live with it for the rest of our lives.

as for your weapon yeah dude 6 deployments on it will take a toll on it. i'm sure the amorer took care of the required maintenance for it. if not then well he or she wasn't doing their job.

The next set of US wars 20 years down the line will probably all be fought by drones. No more humans.

Let me.guess, you've never heard of the caves in Afghanistan and the house to house fighting in Iraq. Not everything can be blown up from up above. Hard to replace actual boots in the ground that can make critical decisions in a matter of sec.

I have three decades in the Army. Give me my M16A2 any day. I believe in one shot one kill, not spray and pray. I have worked military prisons and the only time I'd need a SMG is if a bunch of prisoners/enemy decided to rush me at once. In that case give me a MAC-10. I'd think 29 rounds per second would stop most anything.

The intent of the firearm is to hit the target. If you use a SMG and miss with the first bullet it's not looking good for hitting them with the 2nd, 3rd or 4th either. At that rate your 30-round magazine may as well only have six accurate rounds.

I have also seen conditions in the present war where a US soldier with an M4 on single shot is a better shot that a bad guy with an AK47 on full auto. You can't hit anything on full auto unless it's almost touching you.

__________________"If Jesus had a gun he would be alive today"-Homer Simpson

I have also seen conditions in the present war where a US soldier with an M4 on single shot is a better shot that a bad guy with an AK47 on full auto. You can't hit anything on full auto unless it's almost touching you.

but full auto is so much fun especially if you don't have to pay for the ammo.

M4 works fine. I loved mine; which is why I built 2 ARs. They do the job and do it well.

MP5 would only make sense if you need rounds that wouldn't rip through people AS easy. Even then, the 9mm can still go through somebody. A couple inches "saved" on a weapon all depends what you're doing with it.

You really think you're going to use that weapon in fully collapsed position all the time? I sure as hell didn't; I wanted my rifle ready at all times. I don't want to me messing with the butt stock come something unexpected. So even if one is shorter than the other fully collapsed, how much of that goes out of the door when the weapon is in fight mode?

M4 wins in my book. Knowing I have a 556 round makes me feel better than a 9mm. If I carried a 9mm SMG, the thought in the back of my head would be...

why don't I have a more powerful round?

Which leads to another subject, like the M9. Garbage *** pistol. We need the .45 Cal back.

A submachine gun of some sort would be outstanding in my line of work. On a Submarine, getting an M-16 topside can be a huge PITA and is impossible to use inside the boat in the event that we were boarded. Our M500's are just as bad. Our Mk43's are nearly impossible to get up to the sail without 2-3 people. The only weapon we can issue fast and can use topside or below decks is the M9. It would be really great to have some intermediary between the a shotgun and a handgun. I feel a small SMG would bridge that gap nicely.

__________________"Of all the branches of men in the forces, there is none which shows more devotion and faces grimmer perils than the Submariners." - Sir Winston Churchill

There's a world of difference in firepower between the NATO 5.56, and the 9mm. For up close work though, there is a higher chance of over penetration with the 5.56, which keeps it from working like it's supposed to. Here's some knowledge from a doctor that backs up his talk with graphics and stuff. This video is actually a pretty good objective comparison between rifle rounds and pistol rounds in general.

SMG's have their niche, but for the most part, it is not in conventional warfare. I deployed with a SAW (granted, had a collapsible stock and a short barrel), drove ASV's and MRAPS, and a rediculous number of foot patrols, and I made do with what I had (as did many others before me, and many will after me). My M9 was my "PDW". You don't bring a knife to a sword fight, unless you're fighting in a *really* small space. The M4 was the best compromise, and well-rounded weapon that the services higher-ups had decided on. I don't think it was a bad choice all things considered. Could've been better, could've been worse...

__________________
Assist, Protect, Defend.

Last edited by Larker; 01-04-2013 at 3:28 PM..
Reason: Fixed link and clarification.